Rand Paul changes his mind on earmarks (1 Viewer)

[Saints-Man]

No really. There's nothing incongruous in saying:a) "I oppose earmarks on principle and want them banned" and b) "as long as Washington is going to take Kentucky's money for these projects then I'll fight to get some/most/all of Kentucky's money back for these same projects"

Yeah. It's pretty much the same argument the Libs made after the stimulus was passed and Repubs tried to get some of it for their home states. Why wouldn't they? The money is going to be spent regardless.

The GOP campaigned against the stimulus and then turned around and showed up at ribbon cuttings and wanted to take credit for "bringing jobs and money back to the state".

Uh...how is that different from Democrats who want to raise taxes but pay the lower tax(like income taxes) when their attempts to raise taxes fail? If they were principled, wouldn't they just pay the higher taxes, regardless of what the law stated?

Dont be stupid.

I am not. And, please take your own advice.I am not the one who even originated this idea. This idea has been mentioned in many threads over the years. It is the left's counter-argument to the right over taxes. Please feel free to explain how this is different.

 

[timschochet]

Of course as libertarian he should be opposed to all certifications for anything.

I don't get this.Democrats are allowed to be liberal, moderate, and conservative. Republicans are allowed to be liberal, moderate, and conservative.But when it comes to libertarians, they are expected to follow the most extremist interpretation of every libertarian ideal, otherwise they are not libertarian. It's a ridiculous standard.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Of course as libertarian he should be opposed to all certifications for anything.

I don't get this.Democrats are allowed to be liberal, moderate, and conservative. Republicans are allowed to be liberal, moderate, and conservative.But when it comes to libertarians, they are expected to follow the most extremist interpretation of every libertarian ideal, otherwise they are not libertarian. It's a ridiculous standard.

Democrats and Republicans are parties which can contain a mix of philosophies (political and otherwise). But I did not use "libertarian" to designate the Libertarian Party, but to a core set of beliefs. From those core set of beliefs there are many, many flavors. But while I'm not trying to be an authority on all things libertarian I didn't think the idea that the market place would, could, and should determine who may or may not provide a service without any artificial barriers was all that extremist.That being said I think I got carried away with my remark against certification. The libertarian position I was referencing kicks in when that certification is necessary to provide the service in the market place, and not as an advertising claim.ETA: However, all libertarians should philosophically support free and open markets for labor without any artificial barriers such as borders in the same manner they support all other open market.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Well, is he for earmarks, or against them?